U.S.
Department of Labor
Office of Inspector General
Office of Audit
BRIEFLY…
Highlights of Report Number: 05-06-001-03-390, to
the Assistant Secretary for Employment and
Training.
WHY READ THE REPORT
In 2004, we received two complaints with numerous
allegations which, in general, alleged that
St. Charles County, Missouri, Department of
Workforce Development (DWD) overcharged
Department of Labor (DOL) grants.
St. Charles County is a grant subrecipient of
workforce development funds under the Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) and Welfare-to-Work (WtW)
programs from the Missouri Division of Workforce
Development (Missouri). DWD received
approximately $5.4 million in WIA and WtW funds,
as well as funding for other Federal programs,
during our audit period July 1, 2000 through
July 31, 2004.
WHY OIG DID THE AUDIT
We audited the DOL grants at DWD to determine if
the allegations could be substantiated.
READ THE FULL REPORT
To view the report, including the scope,
methodology, and full agency response,
go to:
http://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/
oa/2006/05-06-001-03-390.pdf
September 2006
St. Charles County’s Department of
Workforce Development Claim to Missouri
Is Unsupported
WHAT OIG FOUND
The complainants made several allegations which,
in general, alleged that DWD overcharged DOL
grants. We cannot conclude on the merits of these
allegations because of a lack of critical
documentation showing how costs actually were
allocated to the DOL grants. However, since DWD
and DOF could not provide critical records to
account for DOL grant funds, they cannot support
their claim for reimbursement to Missouri.
Therefore, we are questioning all WIA and WtW
grant costs, totaling $4,110,061 for the period July 1,
2000 through July 31, 2004.
WHAT OIG RECOMMENDED
We recommend that the Assistant Secretary for
Employment and Training:
• In lieu of DWD’s missing crosswalk
spreadsheets used to allocate costs to DOL
programs, direct Missouri to submit
alternative documentation to support the
claimed cost allocations of $4,110,061
reimbursed to DWD for the period
July 1, 2000 through July 31, 2004. Based
on ETA’s determination, recover
unallowable or unsupportable costs.
• Direct Missouri to ensure that:
- DWD allocates costs to DOL programs
in accordance with the relative benefits
received.
- DWD and DOF maintain adequate
records to account for all expenditures
of DOL program funds.
In their response to the draft report, Missouri and
County officials stated they intend to submit
alternative documentation as evidence of the clients
served by these programs and the expenditures
made on behalf of these programs to assure DOL
that these grants were accounted for, and used to
serve clients for which the grants were intended.
The response did not address Missouri’s actions to
resolve the other two recommendations.
All recommendations will be resolved as part of
ETA’s audit resolution process.